5 ms·

> Since the author doesn't find the language offensive You're missing the point, the author concludes that the companies decide that the language is offensive

> Since the author doesn't find the language offensive You're missing the point, the author concludes that the companies decide that the language is offensive without asking the people who are supposedly the offended party.

lcrz 6y ago
Are you sure about that though? They didn't publish anything about their internal decision making. It is an assumption that they didn't talk to any person of color. The idea of using so called neutral terms is not new: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/3243656.stm http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/3243656.stm
- gebruikersnaam 6y ago
  See my other comment, the author says the change didn't involve the black developer community. I have no knowledge either way, just emphasizing their point.
  - lcrz 6y ago
    Sure. I'm just calling their point into question because I see a lot of people of color that are actively engaged in the evolution of language in the context of slavery. The Rijksmuseum in The Nederlands has changed most occurrences of 'slave' to 'enslaved person' and trying to find out the actual name of the person depicted, among other things. The commission that was responsible for this change was headed by a person of color[0]. This isn't a movement that we are only seeing in Silicon Valley. [0]: https://www.parool.nl/ps/hoofd-geschiedenis-rijksmuseum-ik-wil-mensen-hun-naam-teruggeven~b274072f/ https://www.parool.nl/ps/hoofd-geschiedenis-rijksmuseum-ik-w...
freddie_mercury 6y ago
No, he's complaining that they didn't ask him specifically. It really easy to find black developers who were consulted and agree with the change. Here we go (this took under 5 seconds for me to Google) https://dev.to/afrodevgirl/replacing-master-with-main-in-github-2fjf https://dev.to/afrodevgirl/replacing-master-with-main-in-git... Now there's duelling anecdata and the OP provides no suggestions on how to reconcile them.
- emteycz 6y ago
  They could simply rename their own branches.
  - 1f60c 6y ago
    ...yes? No one is forcing anyone to do anything. I don’t think anyone expects “main” (“develop”, “default”, “trunk”, ...) to ever become the default branch name.
    - emteycz 6y ago
      It is already the default branch name... That's the point of this whole fluff. Nobody would care about people changing their own branch names.
- gebruikersnaam 6y ago
  From the article: "So if this change did not really even attempt to involve the black developer community..."
DetroitThrow 6y ago
As far as I know, most of the changes happening at large companies regarding this have been driven internally primarily by people of color - at MSFT, which owns GitHub, some of these changes were being driven by Employee Resource Groups (affinity groups) which are made up of those who would be affected by the language, for example

lcrz 6y ago

Are you sure about that though? They didn't publish anything about their internal decision making. It is an assumption that they didn't talk to any person of color. The idea of using so called neutral terms is not new: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/3243656.stm http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/3243656.stm

gebruikersnaam 6y ago
See my other comment, the author says the change didn't involve the black developer community. I have no knowledge either way, just emphasizing their point.
- lcrz 6y ago
  Sure. I'm just calling their point into question because I see a lot of people of color that are actively engaged in the evolution of language in the context of slavery. The Rijksmuseum in The Nederlands has changed most occurrences of 'slave' to 'enslaved person' and trying to find out the actual name of the person depicted, among other things. The commission that was responsible for this change was headed by a person of color[0]. This isn't a movement that we are only seeing in Silicon Valley. [0]: https://www.parool.nl/ps/hoofd-geschiedenis-rijksmuseum-ik-wil-mensen-hun-naam-teruggeven~b274072f/ https://www.parool.nl/ps/hoofd-geschiedenis-rijksmuseum-ik-w...

freddie_mercury 6y ago

No, he's complaining that they didn't ask him specifically. It really easy to find black developers who were consulted and agree with the change. Here we go (this took under 5 seconds for me to Google) https://dev.to/afrodevgirl/replacing-master-with-main-in-github-2fjf https://dev.to/afrodevgirl/replacing-master-with-main-in-git... Now there's duelling anecdata and the OP provides no suggestions on how to reconcile them.

emteycz 6y ago
They could simply rename their own branches.
- 1f60c 6y ago
  ...yes? No one is forcing anyone to do anything. I don’t think anyone expects “main” (“develop”, “default”, “trunk”, ...) to ever become the default branch name.
  - emteycz 6y ago
    It is already the default branch name... That's the point of this whole fluff. Nobody would care about people changing their own branch names.
gebruikersnaam 6y ago
From the article: "So if this change did not really even attempt to involve the black developer community..."

DetroitThrow 6y ago

As far as I know, most of the changes happening at large companies regarding this have been driven internally primarily by people of color - at MSFT, which owns GitHub, some of these changes were being driven by Employee Resource Groups (affinity groups) which are made up of those who would be affected by the language, for example